Saturday, March 01, 2008
Even Canadians do not want us to adopt their health care system
It is easier to be a socialist when you have a capitalist living next door:
More than 400 Canadians in the full throes of a heart attack or other cardiac emergency have been sent to the United States because no hospital can provide the lifesaving care they require here.
Most of the heart patients who have been sent south since 2003 typically show up in Ontario hospitals, where they are given clot-busting drugs. If those drugs fail to open their clogged arteries, the scramble to locate angioplasty in the United States begins.
“They rushed me over to Detroit, did the whole closing of the tunnel,” said Eric Bialkowski, 47, of the heart attack he had on March 14, 2007, in Windsor, Ont. “It was like Disneyworld customer service.”
While other provinces have sent patients out of country – British Columbia has sent 75 pregnant women or their babies to Washington State since February, 2007 – nowhere is the problem as acute as in Ontario.
At least 188 neurosurgery patients and 421 emergency cardiac patients have been sent to the United States from Ontario since the 2003-2004 fiscal year to Feb. 21 this year. Add to that 25 women with high-risk pregnancies sent south of the border in 2007.
If we were to adopt a single-payer health care system -- as many progressives wish we would do -- where will we go when we are in trouble?
MORE: For those of you who are interested, you might be interested in my post "A few questions for health care reformers".
13 Comments:
By 
D.E. Cloutier, at
Sat Mar 01, 07:07:00 PM:
Excellent post, TH. The Republicans need to keep this kind of issue at the forefront of the political debate.
In response to any Democratic proposal, Republicans should say, "Show me where your idea has worked effectively. Give me the list of successes."
At the same time the Republicans need to remember that the most optimistic candidate usually wins the Presidency. In 1980 and 1984, Ronald Reagan understood this. In the 1990s, Bill Clinton reportedly stressed this point to his staff frequently. (Bush was more optimistic than Kerry. And yes, even the sourpuss Richard Nixon was more optimistic than Humphrey in 1968 and McGovern in 1972).
By 
, at
Sat Mar 01, 07:21:00 PM:
By Assistant Village Idiot, at
Sat Mar 01, 07:52:00 PM:
I'm not sure the gaps will be very visible. They will be real, but like opportunity costs, easy to ignore if you don't want to know about them.
The psychological benefit of feeling as if you have a safety net is very powerful. The experience of Europe illustrates that you only have to deliver part of the time for people to believe your jive.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Sat Mar 01, 07:58:00 PM:
Would you rather live in Cuba, Anonymous?
Cuba GDP - Per Capita: $4,500 (2007 est.)
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Sat Mar 01, 08:09:00 PM:
This comment has been removed by the author.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Sat Mar 01, 08:11:00 PM:
To TH
Sometime I would like to read your views on the root causes of the problems regarding American health care. (Maybe you already wrote it and I missed it.) I don't remember these issues as a kid. Everybody just went to the doctor in those days. It was no big deal. What changed? Was it the need to practice defensive medicine because of big lawsuits by mostly Democratic lawyers?
By Miss Ladybug, at
Sun Mar 02, 02:02:00 AM:
DEC~
As an answer to your question to TH, from what I've heard/read (can't recall where, specifically - Rush on the radio?), it's because the healthcare industry doesn't really have any incentive to control costs. When you go to the doctor, you don't see a price list for services, and you can't really "comparison shop". And, if you have insurance with a low co-pay, do you really care what an office visit costs? Reimbursement to the doctor is done through your insurance company. The theory goes, that if the American public were having to pay the bills themselves, they'd be much more discerning about what is being charged.
By Jim VAT, at
Sun Mar 02, 09:08:00 AM:
My view:
http://vitalaccuratethinking.blogspot.com/2008/03/healthcare-neighbors.html
But this is the best part:
Progressive Conservative health critic Elizabeth Witmer says it reflects poor planning.
That is particularly the case with neurosurgery, she said, noting that four reports since 2003 have predicted a looming shortage.
“This province and the number of people going outside for care – it's increasing in every area,” Ms. Witmer said.
“I definitely believe that it is very bad planning. ...We're simply unable to meet the demand, but we don't even know what the demand is.”
So, instead of concluding the system just does not work, they just need to plan better.
This is the foundation that sits under economies that rely on centralized planning. When they inevitably crumble and fail, they blame it on poor planning and the need for more planners. As Hayek said 60 years ago, there will never be enough information or an organization good enough to plan an economy. It just does not work. But, it is still coming here and we will find out ourselves.
By , at
Sun Mar 02, 09:12:00 AM:
My software company started selling products to healthcare providers about three years ago. Over the time we've worked in the industry one consistent theme has emerged: public healthcare providers do not have a profit motive, and any efforts those providers might exert to improve themselves are directed at the clinical side and not in the business efficiency side.
Most hospitals have absolutely no sense of customer service, and could care less about whether or not you will choose them for your next emergency visit or operation. They believe the customer's impression of the quality of the doctor associated with them will outweigh any negative impression created by their business operations.
I have no idea what grand idea would "fix" healthcare, but bringing a business-like outlook to the management of almost any hospital would mean a tremendous improvement, I believe, because it absent from most such places. HCA has made a lot of money for the Frists because it accomplished this very thing, but most hospitals are in the dark ages still.
Andrew
By joated, at
Sun Mar 02, 10:05:00 AM:
Wonder how many Canadians never made it across the border for their live saving surgery because of the delay in first going to a Canadian hospital? How many died because the option was never there, being too far from the border for it to be practical?
By Will, at
Sun Mar 02, 12:16:00 PM:
Health care costs are high for the same reasons that rent prices are high in New York: Price controls.
A large percentage of patients have to be charged a predetermined price for any service. These prices are determined by the Feds as part of the medicare/medicaid programs. These prices do no reflect the costs to the service providers. Thus, in order to remain in business, the providers have to raise the prices on the people who don't have a fixed price.
I want my health care to be like my cats - prices up front, lots of options, and death might be the best one.
-Donut
By , at
Sun Mar 02, 03:34:00 PM:
this enlighten doubters about the truth
http://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2008&month=01
By , at
Mon Mar 03, 12:31:00 AM:
MOUNTY TO COWBOY DONT TRY OUR MEDICAL SYSTEM ITS A BIG MESS
